Where does it say that 240W is required for the laptop to run at full performance?
For all we know, it could be a 45W CPU with a 60W GPU… That is, the details of power consumption have not been released yet.
You are confusing the USB-PD negotiation wattage support with the performance / power consumption characteristic of the product.
It’s more the “extended periods” part. It’ll run, but it’ll draw from the battery, which should not be (in my opinion) intended behavior for a device which is presently tethered to a wall by a power supply.
As to the actual consumption specs, if the company is worried about it enough to make it part of the blog post, it’s pretty likely that the power draw is going to be an issue for consumers. I don’t like that their solution for that issue is to tell the consumers to fix it themselves.
Hey folks, this is getting a little contentious and there’s a whole lot of assumptions being thrown around. We’ll release more information over time as we’re still very much in development and things are fluid. I can see this quickly turning south, and I’m going to have to ask to please not make assumptions until more concrete information is provided. We’ll be releasing more updates over the coming weeks. Until then, let’s please stay civil, and assume good intent. Thank you.
Again, for extended use / plugged-in use case, we don’t know what the components are yet. And therefore, don’t know how much will be drawn.
I agree that there are assumptions involved, but only the ones pointed out in the original post:
I appreciate the commitment to info updates! If Framework manages to through either their own power adapter or efficiency engineering make the above quote not the case anymore in the coming weeks, then this whole discussion is moot.
This happens annoyingly frequently around here… I’ve been fairly vocal in my opinion regarding the display and touchpad, and I am always happy to see discussion on what would be “best”, but certain people make a big show about how the upcoming design “checks all of their boxes” but “oh no, there’s this one thing that framework needs to change or they might risk losing a customer!!!” – or something to that effect.
People aren’t actually disappointed in what they see, they’re just trying to play the drama queen in the hopes of bending the final design into their niche use case. Admittedly, I did approach that territory with my touchpad post, but I didn’t require a particular solution – only that the 16’s touchpad be better than the 13’s (which isn’t exactly a hot take in the first place).
@Matthew_Elmer Completely second the point. I believe people are also looking for different things. For example, I am a former Razer enthusiast (yes, too expensive, but doing things others couldn’t) who now turned framework enthusiast and doesn’t mind if battery is drained if it gives me 1 more fps ;). My main thought is about watercooling the GPU bay, and stuff like that ;).
But others may be more productivity focused, so don’t assume one laptop can do it all…
PS: I think 240W is a good “compromise”, 175W for GPU sounds about right ;).
I’m late to this thread and it’s only tangently related, but I’ve got to wonder if the mentioned-by-Linus secondary removable battery that can go into the dGPU/m.2 expansion port can/will have its own type-C connector so that:
you can charge the battery even while its removed from the laptop (that way you can have two and charge one battery while using the other battery or the like)
free up one of the USB-C expansion slots if you really want to maximize the amount of I/O
People in other threads have done deep dives into the connector for the expansion bay. It very much does not seem to be designed for hot swapping. As in USB C is rated for 10000 insertion/removal cycles, PCIe is designed for maybe 50-100, and this connector for even less. This is fragile, it appears to require a number of screws and removal of the keyboard tray to detach. Again, somewhat speculation but these were users diving into the schematics of the connector and bay. Don’t get too excited about hot-swapping batteries just yet. Wait until they talk about the expansion bay officially.
Deep dives? How? It’s not even a purchase-able product yet… Maybe my definition of a “deep dive” is more akin to physical disassembly than your definition?
Regardless, it still can make sense to have a type-c port directly on such secondary battery. I mean, I think Framework even mentioned the dGPUs being able to have their own video outputs or the like, and some existing desktop GPUs (the most recent being the 7900XT/X) have type-C ports on them.
Yep. Frameworks own github shows the connector screwing down with two torx screws.
The connector is FX Beam from neoconix unimicron. There are datasheets.
I could argue though that just two screws isn’t exactly enough in my book to make it not be considered “hot swappable” 
I mean, serial, parallel, VGA, and DVI connectors of old had two (admittedly thumb) screws on them as standard (though some laptops, like a Asus EeePC 1000H netbook I own, lacks the screw holes for its VGA output).
Exactly this.
Absolutely it makes sense. I think extra ports are a great idea. I’m just cautioning against considering hot-swap as an option until FW confirms it, since the evidence indicates it very much is not. Hope for the best, but expect the worst. Pessimistic maybe, but you’ll be less disappointed.
One important aspect then would be the ability to show a removable battery’s charge level even when it’s not connected to the laptop (I have an HP dv6100 which predates internal batteries which has a button and 4 LEDs to show the rought battery percentage)
This would be all the more important if it’s not intended to be hot-swapped like you could with those laptops of old since, otherwise, the only way to be able to check its charge level would be to in fact plug it into the laptop - not an ideal solution if it were to support external charging.
Also, considering that Framework includes function in the BIOS to limit the charging level to a less-than-100% value, I’ve got to wonder if such a function would be able to be built right into the battery itself so that it can do that even when externally charged (though I wouldn’t be surprised if you’d still have to configure it via the laptop’s BIOS or the like while it’s plugged into the laptop, but the idea is that it’d sort of “remember” that even if you remove it and charge it externally)
Not quite sure I’m understanding you there. If it turns out that it is hot-swappable (awesome if that’s the case) then a charge level makes complete sense much like on a battery bank. But if there’s no hotswap then you could just check the charge level in your OS since it’s really just functionally making your internal battery bigger - there’d be no need for an external indicator. Also either way checking battery health/lifespan separate to internal battery makes a lot of sense but the expansion connector should be able to manage that and I’m sure they’ve already thought of that.
Edit: I think I maybe see what you’re getting at. The idea that the only way to charge the expansion battery is externally. That makes very little sense to me. The laptop should be able to charge both the internal battery and expansion battery through normal PD, and likewise charging through the expansion battery should be able to charge both as well. The expansion connector should easily be able to carry that current to both batteries without issue.
If anything, it’s not going to be ‘hot’-swappable. I would assume that any hot-swappability requires protocols for power and signal initialization and termination, and drivers (otherwise the OS is just asking, where did you go?), and also assuming the physical connector has that baked into the specification. If not, you’re asking for Framework to do a hell of a lot of R&D…which I don’t believe it’s currently capable of.
Hi, Have you considered having two usb-c port outputs from the charger, such that one could charge a laptop and another device with appropriate PD management?
Asking as someone who’s appreciated your design approach to the framework charger in keeping it compact and with a standard AC port over a foldout plug (which in my experience can break quickly)
I hope so based on reading between the lines. @Twistgibber can we get an “official” clarification on this?
In my opinion, that line simply means that the charger supports the USB PD standard, and thus can charge any device simultaneously.
We can hope though xD
Indeed, it’s likely single output. If you google around and lookup the datasheet for the WT6676F controller and products that use it, it’s single port output as far as I can tell.
There simply may not be PMICs available doing 180W+ for the USB PD SPD/EPR spec that also support dual or multiple port outputs yet. This said the Anker 737 battery bank supposedly supports multiple outputs and uses the WT6676F but they may have an additional controller going on to facilitate that.